A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-March/117666.html below:

[Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?

[Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function? [Python-Dev] Drop the new time.wallclock() function?Nadeem Vawda nadeem.vawda at gmail.com
Wed Mar 14 22:17:52 CET 2012
+1 for time.steady(strict=False).


On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Kristján Valur Jónsson
<kristjan at ccpgames.com> wrote:
>> - By default, it should fall back to time.time if a better source is
>>  not available, but there should be a flag that can disable this
>>  fallback for users who really *need* a monotonic/steady time source.
> As pointed out on a different thread, you don"t need this "flag" since the code can easily enforce the monotonic property by maintaining a static value.
> This is how we worked around buggy implementations of QueryPerformanceCounter on windows ().
> K

That's fine if you just need the clock to be monotonic, but it isn't
any help if you also want to prevent it from jumping forward.

Cheers,
Nadeem
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4